Wilkins - What really went on...

[Brighton Breezy]

Wilkins wanted to keep Hammond. Knight didn't. He needed a scapegoat for not doing so so slagged off Hammond and thus fell out with Wilkins who was annoyed at the team he had struggled to put together on a small budget (far less than Adams is enjoying now) being torn apart and the relationship between chairman and manager fell apart.

Knight then used Wilkins as a scapegoat to blame poor attendances on (by sacking him and getting Adams in to BOOST seats) to take away the attention from the over-priced tickets etc.

Knight is ruthless. It seems anyone who disagrees with him and does anything which might undermine his popularity with the fans is DISCARDED.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Sometimes you amaze me Richie.

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

Sometimes you amaze me Richie.

.
.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Are the club doing a fans forum before the start of the season?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

.
.

The boy has a future as a stand up comedian, no?

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

The boy has a future as a stand up comedian, no?

Very good

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Why? Knight thrives on publicity. When the chips were down and McGhee was getting abuse from all sides where was Knight defending his manager? Nowhere, until he went on the phone in and refused to respond to almost any critical caller.

Things go well where is Knight? Parading round the pitch or in with the fans accepting all the pats on the back.

Hammond wanted to stay. Wilkins was building a team round him. Knight should have sorted Hammond's contract out in the Summer - not waited until it was too late.

I honestly think had Hammond stayed we would have made the Play Offs.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Why? Knight thrives on publicity. When the chips were down and McGhee was getting abuse from all sides where was Knight defending his manager? Nowhere, until he went on the phone in and refused to respond to almost any critical caller.

Things go well where is Knight? Parading round the pitch or in with the fans accepting all the pats on the back.

Hammond wanted to stay. Wilkins was building a team round him. Knight should have sorted Hammond's contract out in the Summer - not waited until it was too late.

I honestly think had Hammond stayed we would have made the Play Offs.

Hammond didnt make the right noises for someone who wanted to stay. Whenever a player challenges his club to show their ambition it means they are preparing the ground for a departure.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Or maybe wanting to know the club and chairman was serious about promotion rather than selling players and letting others go.

Maybe having had his contract sorted out - or at least been given reassurances it would be earlier on instead of no communication whatsoever from the chairman might have helped the situation.

Hammond also made comments about other players not having their contracts sorted out by the chairman and wanted reassurances these would be done.

I guess we will never know...however much some posters on here like to give the impression they literally have a personal audience with Dick Knight over every minor decision.

Had it ALL been down to Dean Wilkins would Ian Chapman have left in protest?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

If Hammond wanted to stay (which I believe he did), then the Manager and the Chairman could surely have worked together to achieve an outcome that kept him here on fair terms?

Apparently not.

And if the Manager and the Chairman aren't working together ... the first law of football says that it'll be the Manager who packs his bags.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Obviously, if the manager and chairman are not getting on then it is always going to be the manager who makes way. It does not take a genius to work that one out.

But, does that necessarily mean the manager was at fault? Of course not.

If the chairman, as has been suggested elsewhere, was in charge of contracts HE should have sorted out Hammond's MONTHS before it became an issue.

What more can the manager do other than tell the chairman he wants to keep his captain at the club and encourage the chairman to find the finances to do this?

 

[The Large One]

Obviously, if the manager and chairman are not getting on then it is always going to be the manager who makes way. It does not take a genius to work that one out.

But, does that necessarily mean the manager was at fault? Of course not.

If the chairman, as has been suggested elsewhere, was in charge of contracts HE should have sorted out Hammond's MONTHS before it became an issue.

What more can the manager do other than tell the chairman he wants to keep his captain at the club and encourage the chairman to find the finances to do this?

In this instance, WHEN the contracts were sorted is not the primary issue here.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

The manager needs to be as realistic about the finances as the Chairman.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

In this instance, WHEN the contracts were sorted is not the primary issue here.

Well Dean Hammond's comments about going months without hearing anything from the chairman despite asking for reassurances of his contract would suggest otherwise...

The manager needs to be as realistic about the finances as the Chairman.

The finances of a chairman who had just cashed in 150k for Revell and let Savage et al go?

A chairman who has since CLEARLY released a higher budget got wages to Micky Adams?

Surely then the chairman must also appreciate a manager needs his big players and cannot constantly rebuild a team without it having a negative effect on the results.

A chairman who perhaps could have seen the long-term financial benefits of a likely play-off place and possible promotion?

I honestly think Knight never really wanted Wilkins as manager long-term and did not have the confidence in his judgement to release the funds we are now being seen given to Adams.

 

[Easy 10]

the first law of football says that it'll be the Manager who packs his bags.

# Law 1 - The Field of Play
The field of play must be rectangular. The length of the touch line must be greater than the length of the goal line. Length: minimum 90 m (100 yds) maximum 120 m (130 yds). Width: minimum 45 m (50 yds) maximum 90 m (100 yds)
International Matches: Length: minimum 100 m (110 yds) maximum 110 m (120 yds). Width: minimum 64 m (70 yds) maximum 75 m (80 yds)
A penalty area is defined at each end of the field as follows: lines are drawn at right angles to the goal line, 16.5 m (18 yds) from the inside of each goalpost. These lines extend into the field of play for a distance of 16.5 m (18 yds) and are joined by a line drawn parallel with the goal line. The area bounded by these lines and the goal line is the penalty area.
Within each penalty area, a penalty mark is made 11 m (12 yds) from the midpoint between the goalposts and equidistant to them. An arc of a circle with a radius of 9.15 m (10 yds) from each penalty mark is drawn outside the penalty area. The distance between the posts is 7.32 m (8 yds) and the distance from the lower edge of the crossbar to the ground is 2.44 m (8 ft). Both goalposts and the crossbar have the same width and depth, which do not exceed 12 cm (5 ins).

(The FA.com)

 

[Da Man Clay]

I honestly think Knight never really wanted Wilkins as manager long-term and did not have the confidence in his judgement to release the funds we are now being seen given to Adams.

I'd agree with that, think he was always a bit of a gatekeeper for when Falmer was approved and we could start building the team for the Championship.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

120m x 45m would be even FLAIRER.

 

[The Large One]

Well Dean Hammond's comments about going months without hearing anything from the chairman despite asking for reassurances of his contract would suggest otherwise...



The finances of a chairman who had just cashed in 150k for Revell and let Savage et al go?

A chairman who has since CLEARLY released a higher budget got wages to Micky Adams?

Surely then the chairman must also appreciate a manager needs his big players and cannot constantly rebuild a team without it having a negative effect on the results.

A chairman who perhaps could have seen the long-term financial benefits of a likely play-off place and possible promotion?

I honestly think Knight never really wanted Wilkins as manager long-term and did not have the confidence in his judgement to release the funds we are now being seen given to Adams.

The contract talks started in October. Revell was sold at the very end of January, so Knight didn't have that £150,000.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I honestly think Knight never really wanted Wilkins as manager long-term and did not have the confidence in his judgement to release the funds we are now being seen given to Adams.

Maybe Wilkins had the chance to win the chairman's confidence and never took it?